A sexist rant from a government advisor

Dec 21, 2017 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

In an Op-ed piece published on December 6, 2017 in the state-owned Guyana Chronicle, captioned ‘On the school system, predators and Society’s Good People’, self-styled ‘senior government’ functionary Mr. Ruel Johnson, embarked on a laborious dissertation seeking to justify his role and conduct, in using social and main stream media to wage a personal battle against my client, Mr. Coen Jackson, a teacher attached to The Bishops’ High School.
The readership would have observed the great length to which Mr. Johnson resorted to defend himself, after it was revealed that he is motivated by a personal vendetta against my client, and that he used private information discussed with him by a young lady, to launch his attack, all whilst promoting himself as some “Women’s Rights Saviour”.
In his Op-ed, Mr. Johnson also writes about ‘legal ethics and victim-shaming’, attacking Mr. Coen Jackson’s defence team that included a young female, Attorney-at-law. He specifically singled out the only female Attorney-at-law, Ms. Priyanka Sookraj, for his most vicious attack.
He states that the defence team revealed the identity of a possible victim. This is untrue and in fact, it was Mr. Johnson who first alluded to the young lady’s identity, via his Facebook page. What was stated to the media by the defence team was in response to questions led by the media, referencing Mr. Johnson’s said Facebook posts.
Also revealed in the Op-ed, is Mr. Johnson’s cultivated sexist mindset and attitude. He writes, Attorney-at-law Ms. Sookraj was, ‘a young woman who could have easily been the target of his (Jackson’s), advances’, thereby insinuating that her involvement in the matter has nothing to do with her ability.
He is also insinuating that Attorney-at-law, Ms. Sookraj could have been a possible victim, and may be suffering from what is known as the Stockholm syndrome, where a victim becomes a defender of her attacker.
These innuendos are not only ludicrous but libelous. Mr. Johnson, who boasts about never ever being sued for defamation, should now be worried, and not sit so smug and comfortably. He should consult a competent lawyer.
Apart from being sexist, Mr. Johnson’s statements are divisive in nature. While it is most surprising coming from a person who holds a ‘senior government position’, at the Ministry of Social Cohesion, where great attention is being paid to heal wounds, to bring gender balance, racial and religious unity, equity among regions and the promotion of a harmonious peaceful Guyana, it is not surprising coming from Mr. Johnson, who described himself as ‘unkempt, crude and foul-mouthed’.
Mr. Johnson also describes himself as an incredibly flawed man with a less than stellar history with women. These words don’t absolve from his own sexist conduct and is proof that he is not ‘fit and proper’ to be a ‘senior government’ functionary, receiving a fat salary with liberal access to state resources including the Guyana Chronicle, and perks paid by taxpayers of this country.
These qualities certainly cannot be the ones that H.E. President Brig. David Arthur Granger’s would want our young folks to emulate.
Our ’senior government’ functionary Mr. Johnson, should be reminded of Article 149 (1) (b) of the Constitution of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana, states ‘that no person shall be treated in a discriminatory manner by any person acting by virtue of any written law or in the performance of the functions of any public office, or any public authority’.
Article 149(2) states that ‘discrimination means affording different treatment to persons attributable wholly or mainly to their sex or gender, inter alia’.
Article ‘149 A’ states that ‘No person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his or her right to work, that is to say the right to free choice of employment.’
The combination of these enshrined provisions of our constitution put Attorney-at-law Ms. Priyanka Sookraj, well within her rights to act as legal counsel, for anyone she chooses to represent.
Based on his Op-ed, Mr. Johnson appears to want to deny Attorney-at-law Ms. Priyanka Sookraj the right to partake in this matter, solely on the basis that she is a woman.
The Minister of Social Cohesion, Dr. George Norton, has so far not addressed or condemned Mr. Ruel Johnson’s sexist adumbration. Equally the Hon. Prime Minister, Mr. Moses Nagamootoo, under whom the Guyana Chronicle Newspaper operates, has so far not distanced himself from the sexist statements made by his Government’s ‘senior functionary’.
Therefore, is the public to conclude that the government embraces and endorses such sexist policy coming from one of its policy advisors?
Jerome Khan
Attorney-at-law

---

---